MildaveAs I understand it the figure is 60% ToT, and something tells me SPECTRA is part of that other 40%.
Any sources available on that? I’ve always heard Dassault/Thales saying they would give full ToT on Spectra and RBE to India, Brazil and the UAE, allowing the customer to reprogram them as they see fit (of course I’m aware it sounds better in words that it does in reality…)
MildaveWhat about the three RC-135s the MoD is putting into service by 2014? BTW wouldn’t they perform similar functions as the Sentinel?
MildaveAs expected, Rafale might have an Indianised EW suite on-board.
http://newindianexpress.com/nation/article1437528.eceGuys, keep an eye out for details (especially you, Teer 🙂 )
That article doesn’t say that Rafales for India will have an homegrown EW suite on-board, it says that BEL will sign an MoU with Dassault to implement SAR and the EW suite, probably a concession from the MoD toward the private sector (as requested by Dassault) for the ToT instead of having HAL do it.
Given the fact that SPECTRA is integrated into the Rafale and fused to its sensors, it would take a lot of money, testing etc. to integrate a new system. It would be quite pointless since Dassault/Thales are supposed to provide India full access and transfert of the technology.
MildaveThe “legacy Link-16” is being constantly upgraded, and I doubt it’s when non stealth aircraft are going to use it that they’re going to suddenly be detected lol.
At the end of the day mission success is about degrading your enemy’s ability to see, track and kill you. LO is but one way of achieving that. It’s not to be dismissed, but it shouldn’t become so sacrosanct that no amount of money is enough…
Anyway IMO the 6th Gen main characteristic will be affordability lol, in that regard I know of at least two 6th gen aircraft (Gripen and Rafale…:diablo:).
MildaveThere is currently no deal between France and India to supply the Rafale M, so there should be no to troubles at all concerning a two seater, and I doubt the Indian Navy will necessarily require a two seaters since that would automaticly eliminate quite a number of aircraft, especially with they’re still operating a STOBAR carrier.
MildaveAccording to Raytheon, the RAF Sentinel and Shadow aircraft could be used for maritime patrol with only a software upgrade. Of course it would probably only be maritime surveillance rather than a full mpa capability but I think it would be a good idea to expand these aircraft’s role given the RAF experience with them.
On aquiring new types, IMO, the UK could buy the sea hercule or C-295 MPA if the requirement is to focus on defensive operation along the coast.
For a more aggressive and multirole requirements that could see the aircraft flying much further especially to put the ESM capabilities to use, then a P-8I or A-319 MPA is the way to go.
I wasn’t aware of the Barracuda though can anyone provide me with more details on its capabilities (range payload etc)? However unless the UK can find a partener I doubt going alone in this would be a good idea…
MildaveNo good news for F-35 haters here… the F-35 is already funded.
From the articles you quoted yourself, only 64 F-35 have been funded so far?! I don’t really see how you can translate that into the entire F-35 program being funded especially when nobody knows yet how much it’ll really cost…
MildaveAnother issue which might slightly delay the deal is that the IAF requires two-seater jets and not the one-seater model presently produced by Dassault, but this should be solved in due time.
Really?! I don’t know who wrote that article, but it wasn’t very informative, very repetitive and with some mistakes in it… Wasn’t really worth reading tbh.
MildaveFrench and Malian troops take Timbuktu airport
After seizing the airport in Timbuktu overnight, French and Malian forces are preparing to retake the historic desert city. The bloodless assault on the city’s airport involved France’s first operational paratroop drop since 1978.
[…]Reporting from the airport where he is embedded with French forces, FRANCE 24 correspondent Mathieu Mabin said that “not one shot had been fired” and that the mission had included France’s first operational paratroop drop in 35 years.
MildaveSpeaking about choppers, I’m wondering whether the AS 532 Cougar Horizon Battlefield Surveillance Helicopter would have been of any utility in this conflict.
IMO that chopper had a very short operational life, but I haven’t been able to find much towards its real capabilities and such.
MildaveLol… no aircraft is invisible to the human eye nor have noise cancellation…. Its sooo ridiculous how everybody on this forum seems to try their best no matter how silly it sounds to discredit the idea of stealth and its benefits. It is a game changer and the F117 was extremely successful in what it was able to accomplish….
I don’t think anybody is seriously saying LO is something to be dismissed, at least no countries building aircraft today are saying so, and a simple look at US, Russian, Chinese and European projets is enough to convince anyone.
Same, nobody is arguing that the jet engine wasn’t a revolution, but the first jet aircraft were still getting shot by propeller aircraft, and weren’t able to change WWII due to be too complex, too expansive and very limited in operational use.
The problem with stealth is that it may have been a revolution when first introduced with the F117 which was a complete surprise over Bagdad which explain its success, but because of the speed at which counter measures are being developped and the speed at which electronics evolve, stealth is no longer today a guarantee of repeating Bagdad anywhere over a modern air defence network.
Serbia showed that a enemy which isn’t very high tech can ambush a stealth aircraft if he’s looking for it, and so I’m sure a country with the money and technical capabilities can do much better.
So since we’re no longer talking about the invulnerability of LO aircraft, the question is given their cost, are they effective platform to risk in a conflict if you know that you enemy can kill you using much cheaper platform?
How close can you get from your enemy before being detected and how effective can you be against it?
Now given the F-22 record, and trend, and given the fact the F-35 is showing little improvement, can you rely in 2025 on a fleet of aircraft that must be grounded every two or three months due to unexplained troubles?
Can you rely on a aircraft that you must keep lowering the standard for it to be accepted into service?
War is about reliability and so far the F-117, B-2, F-22 and F-35 family have showed a lot of things but that is not one of them.
LM hasn’t proved to this day that they have found a successful way of reducing maintenance cost, troubles etc. on LO aircraft. Yes they’ve done a lot of progress, but is it enough to allow a air force to rely completely on stealth aircraft?
Well the answer of the USAF to that answer is to upgrade its fleet of 4th gen aircraft to last well beyond 2030, and my guess is that so called 5th gen still have a way to go especially with the fact that most sensors can be successfuly used by 4th gen platform with great effect and lower cost.
It has already happened in the naval sector, it’ll probably happen with the aviation at some point. Gouvernments and the US first will sooner or later realize they can’t afford the constantly increasing costs to acquire expansive material when you can do the same job with cheaper platform. I beleive the F-22/F-35 fiascos will lead most gouvernments to consider less advanced aircraft that are good for the job rather than develop new aircraft which are simply too complex and too advanced to be used in war.
MildaveVHF/UHF doesn’t have the accuracy to guide a SAM to stop a VLO attacker. It can be ignored because it isn’t a direct threat to accomplishment of the mission.
All you need is to detect its presence so that you know the area where to look for, then any modern firing control radar using AESA can track the aircraft and shoot it.
MildaveAccording to the french MoD and Le mamouth blog, in the last 36hrs 2 more Rafales joined in the operation that totalled about 30 sorties with air-strikes supporting SFs as well as regular army in taking Gao’s airport, a brigde nearby in preparation for taking the town.
Looks like France is now deploying about 3000 troops and is well into the North of Mali (which Hollande said wouldn’t happen), so I sure hope France will know when to stop or risk a very complicated situation.
While it’s true that there is currently a capacity gap in strategic stransports, I doubt there would be an operational need to buy the C-17 given the number of A-400M on orders. That’s pretty much the first time France requires help in strategic airlift due to the speed at which Islamists tried to move to the south of Mali.
In a “normal” situation where France would have more time to prepare and anticipate an action that would require that many vehicules and equipments to be transported, then airlift might not be the cheaper option.
There is currently one BPC heading to the North of Africa with quite a bit of equipments/vehicules etc. on board. Coupled with the A-400M (which as it has been pointed out is years behind…) for rapid projection, I believe there is more than enough to do the job.
Heavy helicos might be useful be then again depending on the situation on the ground, CN-235 will probably do the job (probably why France is securing one airport after the other). I don’t believe the operational Puma fleet is anywhere near the number quoted in a recent post, but from what I can gather quite a few transport helicopters have been transported to Mali to complement those already nearby in Niger that were used by SFs.
MildaveThe one aspect that has not changed is VLO stealth’s ability to reduce the RF return to SAM receivers. All the fancy processing by SAM state-of-art computing equipment means nothing if the RF returns are below the SAM receiver’s detection threshold (for a given range).
Really? I guess nobody bothered developping low frequency radars, or using the prodigious increase in processing power during all that time to detect VLO objects…
MildaveIn addition to a VLO airframe, the F-35 has the benefit of:
1. ESM that is second only to the F-22
2. The EODAS tracks rising SAMs and can alert the F-35 pilots and tell them which F-35 (if any) is the target.
3. The F-35 can dynamically adjust route planning in flight.
In addition to a supposed VLO airframe, the F-35 has the benefit of: a PR compaing second only to the F-22…
And of course by the time it does enter service, and is fully operational will have a slight advantage in aerodynamics, ESM and RCS reduction due to carrying weapons internally… that is of course as long as its complexity remain battle proof (and so far storm proof lol), and financially operable.
Meanwhile in a new era where every modern nations will be able to deploy air defence system able to track ballistic missiles, drones, or even rockets, the F-35 will mostly be used as a bomb truck in the war against terrorism (golden cow with no end in sight), while LM PRs will start telling us how only a 6th generation aircraft can guarantee the safety of the free world… and of course everyone will have to have a UCAV…
BTW even LM no longer call the F-35 VLO but LO only… and in the end, no modern air defences will be taken down by any one plane, so this discussion is rather pointless.
Modern armies uses integrated and networked weapons systems to destroy their targets. That can range from SFs, to hackers, to AWACS, to cruise missiles to any plane able to carry them 4th, 5th or drones…
Sign In
